If Jeremy Lamb Becomes on par w/ Harden, Does OKC face same situation?

Attention!!! Pro Sports Daily will be down on Wednesday morning from 5:00am - 7:00am eastern time for database maintenance. All Sports Direct Inc. properties will be down during this scheduled outage.
Sorry for any inconvenience that this outage may cause.

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

The great thing about it after the 4 years are up is that Lamb would have already seen how it has played out. Assuming (which we shouldn't) that he reaches a similar level, I think he'd be more inclined to accept a little less knowing that Presti will trade him and that it's not that big of a difference in money, but it is in winning.

The great thing about it after the 4 years are up is that Lamb would have already seen how it has played out. Assuming (which we shouldn't) that he reaches a similar level, I think he'd be more inclined to accept a little less knowing that Presti will trade him and that it's not that big of a difference in money, but it is in winning.

And that's where the naiveness in the world of business and professional sports kicks in.

In 2-3 yrs, if Lamb becomes the equivalent of what James Harden is now (but not a level above that), and he asks for the max just like Harden did this summer, does OKC find themselves in the same bind?

Is it cyclical?

Like would OKC have to get rid of Lamb (ala Harden) and trade him away and get another rookie (ala Rookie Lamb ?)

Mind you that Maynor and Ibaka will probably have heavy contracts to go along with Westy and KD. And also take into account the repeater tax that goes into effect in 2013-2014 and gets progressively worse for luxury tax teams as the yrs go on.

Does this make it even tougher for a OKC-like market to retain a Harden (probably Lamb in the future) ?

I mean as a franchise, where you draw the line and budge and say, "Ok, we are sticking with this guy, we will budge financially, we're not going to keep trading pieces of our core anymore".

yes that is some good points.

Part of what is happening to OKC is just coincidence. For instance, if we assume that Harden is not overrated, and that Lamb could be just as good or even better, then OKC's problem essentially is that their role players they are trying to develop are actually more in the "star" category, which doesn't fit their financial model.

They are trying to win with a two-superstar model, but then the picture gets distorted because they also have two high priced bigs, and then also one of their role players (Harden) was performing more like a star, even to the point that commentators were just calling Durant-Harden-Westbrook a "big three."

This could happen again with Lamb, there's no doubt.

What OKC really needs to do, in order to stay under $100M salary+luxury, besides getting a cheaper center than Perkins maybe, is to develop role players the way the Lakers develop role players.

They need good quality low-first and second round draft picks, like Ebanks, Ariza, etc, that they can develop and keep for a reasonable price, who won't be hot commodities in free agency. Sefalosha fits that mold.

For this year, though, the next two or three years, they are in great shape with Lamb (and Martin thrown into the mix as well, plus two extra first round picks).

Part of what is happening to OKC is just coincidence. For instance, if we assume that Harden is not overrated, and that Lamb could be just as good or even better, then OKC's problem essentially is that their role players they are trying to develop are actually more in the "star" category, which doesn't fit their financial model.

They are trying to win with a two-superstar model, but then the picture gets distorted because they also have two high priced bigs, and then also one of their role players (Harden) was performing more like a star, even to the point that commentators were just calling Durant-Harden-Westbrook a "big three."

This could happen again with Lamb, there's no doubt.

What OKC really needs to do, in order to stay under $100M salary+luxury, besides getting a cheaper center than Perkins maybe, is to develop role players the way the Lakers develop role players.

They need good quality low-first and second round draft picks, like Ebanks, Ariza, etc, that they can develop and keep for a reasonable price, who won't be hot commodities in free agency. Sefalosha fits that mold.

For this year, though, the next two or three years, they are in great shape with Lamb (and Martin thrown into the mix as well, plus two extra first round picks).

If the Lakers were great at developing players, where are they? Lakers lost Ariza to Morey as well. Ebanks sucks

"It’s absolutely ludicrous” (to judge players based on whether they’ve won a title.)

Part of what is happening to OKC is just coincidence. For instance, if we assume that Harden is not overrated, and that Lamb could be just as good or even better, then OKC's problem essentially is that their role players they are trying to develop are actually more in the "star" category, which doesn't fit their financial model.

They are trying to win with a two-superstar model, but then the picture gets distorted because they also have two high priced bigs, and then also one of their role players (Harden) was performing more like a star, even to the point that commentators were just calling Durant-Harden-Westbrook a "big three."

This could happen again with Lamb, there's no doubt.

What OKC really needs to do, in order to stay under $100M salary+luxury, besides getting a cheaper center than Perkins maybe, is to develop role players the way the Lakers develop role players.

They need good quality low-first and second round draft picks, like Ebanks, Ariza, etc, that they can develop and keep for a reasonable price, who won't be hot commodities in free agency. Sefalosha fits that mold.

For this year, though, the next two or three years, they are in great shape with Lamb (and Martin thrown into the mix as well, plus two extra first round picks).

Lakers and develop players should not be in the same sentence. They import players via free agency.

I mean this is the obviously type of problem they would want to encounter.

They can deal with it in 4 years. Who know what the landscape will be like in 4 years? They have an amnesty to work as well.

Im a Rockets fan and I was VERY high on Jeremy Lamb. He's a great player. Very smooth, never makes mistakes. Seems very mature.

Now, I don't think he had the pull that Harden does RIGHT NOW to get good players RIGHT NOW. He may not even develop. So i see why the Rockets went with Harden right now at 23 versus what Lamb could do in 3 years.

That said, OKC got a great deal. K-Mart will flourish in his new role.

I mean this is the obviously type of problem they would want to encounter.

They can deal with it in 4 years. Who know what the landscape will be like in 4 years? They have an amnesty to work as well.

Im a Rockets fan and I was VERY high on Jeremy Lamb. He's a great player. Very smooth, never makes mistakes. Seems very mature.

Now, I don't think he had the pull that Harden does RIGHT NOW to get good players RIGHT NOW. He may not even develop. So i see why the Rockets went with Harden right now at 23 versus what Lamb could do in 3 years.

That said, OKC got a great deal. K-Mart will flourish in his new role.

Even if KMart doesn't work out, they can treat him as an expiring and get that cap space to resign Maynor and Ibaka.

I'm not saying those are the best players in the league, or that they had the most stellar Laker careers or stayed here their entire career, just pointing out that these are the kind of players OKC needs, guys who can play a role and get some good minutes in, but won't necessarily become the hottest free agent on the market and break the bank, because OKC is on a budget.

And in any case, the Lakers have clearly always been a team that developed top notch talent. Magic Johnson, Byron Scott, Kobe, Bynum, Vlade, James Worthy, Doug Christie, Nick Van Exel, Eddie Jones...

the list could go on and on and on. And not just the homegrown stars the Lakers develop. So many players, their stock goes way up after playing a few seasons, or even just one camp, in Los Angeles, and they go on to have good careers elsewhere in the NBA also.

but I wasn't trying to get in a ****ing contest about the Lakers being a good franchise or whatever, I was just pointing out that OKC needs some cheap workable role players. They keep spiking it big in the draft and that's why they have these hard choices.

Think about it: if they were really going all out, they could've found a way to keep Harden (obviously) but they also could've found a way to get Jeremy Lamb. AND they already have Perry III. So in three years, they could've wound up with

Durant -- max
WB --- max
Harden --- max

+

Lamb -- maybe all star? maybe worth close to max?
Ibaka -- maybe all star? maybe worth close to max?

I mean, they could've wound up with like 5 All Stars if Lamb and Ibaka really improve, and then maybe Perry is one of the hotter young big prospects by then and Perkins is maybe the 5th best center in the league or something. No way OKC can afford all that.

Of course. And I will make it worse by presuming that you are referring to my post.

However, all I'm saying is that, for whatever reason, OKC keeps getting all this top notch draft talent even though they are already stacked.

I mean, adding Harden at #3 in the draft to Durant and Westbrook is just ridiculous. The highest Laker draft pick in the past ten years was #10, and that was Andrew Bynum whom the Lakers had to patiently develop for years and years to get to all star level.

So, for salary reasons, they choose to let go of Harden, but they immediately replace him with Lamb, drafted at #12, who should easily have been a lottery pick. And they already had Perry III an absolute steal at #28.

If they want to follow the superstar Kobe/Shaq or Lebron/Wade model or whatever, they gotta realize they need some players, maybe seasoned veterans, who will do their roles. You can either bring up low draft picks, or else sign older vets who are hunting for a ring. Rather than these hot young prospects who are going to finish 3 years and then be looking to get paid, and then two years later looking for the big free agent contract of their career.

For instance Ray Allen to Miami. Miami didn't have to pay Ray Allen $15M a year, and they don't have to sign him for 10 years either. All those kind of vets and role players is what OKC needs, otherwise OP is right, OKC will be repeating this same scenario.

basically it just shows the unfairness of the draft system with the weighted lotto, because OKC gets one good lottery pick (Harden) and can keep trading that value forward and recycling for younger talent every few years (say in 3 years trade Lamb for the 2015 #7 pick or whatever, and then three years later trade that player maybe for the #3 pick in the 2018 draft, or whatever).

that's one reason why every team should have some ping pong balls in the draft yo